Optimising Europe's Benefits from the Copernicus Programme

Optimising Europe’s Benefits from the Copernicus Programme

Addressing the Structural Gaps in Operational Earth Observation

April 2015

Herbert Allgeier Harry Eyres Roy Gibson Peter Hulsroj Arne Lahcen

Title: Optimising Europe’s Benefits from the Copernicus Programme ISSN: 2218-0931 Published in April 2015

Editor and publisher: European Space Policy Institute, ESPI Schwarzenbergplatz 6 • 1030 Vienna • Austria http://www.espi.or.at Tel. +43 1 7181118-0; Fax -99

Rights reserved – No part of this report may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or for any purpose without permission from ESPI. Citations and extracts to be published by other means are subject to mentioning “Source: Optimising Europe’s Benefits from the Copernicus Programme; April 2015. All rights reserved” and sample transmission to ESPI before publishing.

ESPI is not responsible for any losses, injury or damage caused to any person or property (including under contract, by negligence, product liability or otherwise) whether they may be direct or indirect, special, inciden- tal or consequential, resulting from the information contained in this publication.

Design: Panthera.cc

ESPI 2 April 2015 Optimising Europe’s Benefits from the Copernicus Programme

Preamble

The field of Earth Observation (EO) has wit- links in the current programme architecture. nessed remarkable development since the first The authors of the current document believe proof-of-concept and technology demonstration this Task Force proposal will facilitate the de- missions of the 1960s. This is true not only velopment of a sustainable programme ap- because new generations of satellites and in- proach that serves the interests of the involved struments have led to an exponential growth in agencies and ultimately the European stake- monitoring capabilities, but also because EO as holders that will benefit from Copernicus. As a a practice is moving into a new development first step in this direction the authors propose phase in its life cycle. With the introduction of that a workshop is arranged bringing together operational services – a capacity that is cur- the main players to discuss in an open and rently being implemented under the Copernicus constructive fashion which options could be programme – both the playing field and the further reflected upon or taken forward and market for Earth Observation will be trans- how. The authors would like to stress that the formed in a number of ways. review presented in this document is based upon a set of principles that should facilitate the First and foremost, the new data streams and technical and political feasibility of finding solu- the six services defined within the programme tions: will further increase the benefits associated with existing use and it is expected that that • The analysis and recommendations pre- they will enable the market to generate addi- sented are related to the programmatic tional added value streams as new applications and managerial aspects of the Coperni- are developed – also beyond the purposes of cus programme only. The recommenda- environmental monitoring and security, such as tions do not imply or suggest the estab- agriculture and traffic management. In addi- lishment of additional infrastructure, nei- tion, the introduction of operational services will ther in space nor on ground; open up new opportunities to monitor and com- • The Task Force proposal is based on the municate to society the health of our planet. premise that the roles and responsibili- Moreover, the user driven character of Coperni- ties of existing institutional players be cus has the potential to create a truly public left unchanged. In other words, the pro- good, its evolution steered by its stakeholders. posed recommendations do not imply the To benefit from these opportunities in an opti- creation of a new agency in Europe, nei- mised fashion, however, the proper institutional ther do they call for an extensive reor- mechanisms need to be in place – quite a chal- ganisation of existing responsibilities; lenge considering the multi-institutional involvement in the programme. • The recommendations endeavour to make use of existing European capabilities and In order to reflect on these future opportunities expertise to the maximum extent possible. and challenges related to Copernicus, the Euro- Achieving this will require that the different pean Space Policy Institute (ESPI) organised a institutions involved in Copernicus will con- brainstorming session bringing around the table tinue to cooperate in a spirit of trust and the authors of this piece. The purpose of the with a focus on the creation of increased event was to reflect, with due modesty, on the beneficial outcomes for the citizens, enter- road that has been taken in the development of prises and governments of Europe. operational Earth observation capabilities and on the potential future path of this most inter- The ambition of this report is to improve the esting field of space utilisation. The current exploitation of Copernicus across the widest document seeks to capture the findings and possible range of European user communi- reflections of our brainstorming. First, the ties. As a consequence, recommendations document reviews which policy and programme made through the document lead to augmen- support functions have been addressed ade- tation of existing infrastructure and services quately and which elements might merit further rather than their substitution, and to propos- action. Based on this evaluation the creation of als for the establishment of improved delivery a Copernicus Task Force is proposed as a first of information services through the Coperni- step towards overcoming the perceived missing cus programme.

ESPI 1 April 2015

1. The Copernicus Programme: a Review

Over the last couple of decades both the so- the programme would be structured around cioeconomic and strategic importance of EO an architecture of four interrelated compo- has risen considerably. Thanks to technologi- nents, as illustrated in figure 1 below. cal progress in the areas of remote sensing capabilities, environmental modelling and the ability to disseminate data, the benefits generated for the users are considerably higher than in the past. As a result governments and other decision-makers are relying ever more on environmental information and geospatial intelligence. They do so because it facilitates management tasks and daily activities and improves outcomes. Moreover, it supports the creation, evaluation and enforcement of a range of policies and enables them to link economic growth to sustainable development. Environmental monitoring capabilities are also indispensable for the scientific community seeking to increase the understanding of our planet and the environmental problems that create pressure on a planetary scale. The intensifying stresses on planetary re- sources and systems caused by human action, which can be monitored with ever greater accuracy by the use of satellite data, Figure 1: Copernicus System Architecture. are of increasing concern not just to policy- makers and scientists, but also to ordinary The system’s data input would be provided by citizens. All these elements have pushed the two main sources. The in-situ observations scientific, institutional and civic demand for would be coming from ground-based stations environmental information whilst, in parallel, and airborne and seaborne measurements. the utility of EO for a range of security chal- The space component would consist of new lenges was increasingly realised. As a result infrastructure in the form of the Sentinel sat- the awareness became acute that operational ellites and of contributing missions. In addi- monitoring capabilities were required, and tion to the data streams generated by the thus the issue became more prominent on constellation, output would be provided in the the political agenda. form of thematic services in six predefined fields: (1) land monitoring, (2) marine monitoring, (3) atmosphere monitoring, (4) emer- 1.1 Copernicus’s Implementa- gency management, (5) security and, (6) climate change. tion: the Facts Since the utility of the data output and the six services are highly dependent on the in- A major milestone in the process of establish- tegration of additional socio-economic and ing operational monitoring capabilities was statistical data with the data sets provided by the European decision to set up the Coperni- the physical systems, a data integration and cus programme, formerly known as Global information management component is Monitoring for Environment and Security added to the overall GMES system. The (GMES). In February 2004, after a five year modular structure was partly chosen to as- reflection and preparation period following sure sufficient flexibility during the deploy- the signing of the Baveno Manifesto in 1998, ment of the programme, taking into account the European Commission released a Com- that the data provision components would be munication with a concrete Action Plan aimed built in parallel to the different sets of ser- at establishing a working GMES capability by vices. 2008. More specifically, the core capacity of

ESPI 2 April 2015 Optimising Europe’s Benefits from the Copernicus Programme

The overall system architecture clearly re- tional organisations, such as EUMETSAT. In flects the multilateral nature of the pro- addition to this a GMES Advisory Council gramme, which has very much determined (GAC) was established that would provide the course of its implementation. The institu- advice to GMES management, coordinate tional responsibilities were distributed, as activities, exchange experience and facilitate foreseen, to different European organisations consensus-building around the development according to their technical expertise and of a long term perspective. This body con- mission. The European Space Agency (ESA) sisted of representatives of the European is responsible for the implementation of the Commission, the European Union (EU) Mem- space component which consists of the Senti- ber-States, the European Space Agency, the nel satellites, their instruments and the re- European Environment Agency, EUMETSAT, quired ground infrastructure. More specifi- as well as other relevant EU agencies, space cally, the Agency oversees and co-funds the industry, service providers, users, research development of the Sentinel 1, 2 and 3 satel- organisations and academia. As of 2006 the lites and the Sentinel 4 and 5 instruments GAC started to provide advice to a newly flown on the satellites of the European Or- created GMES Bureau. The latter was estab- ganisation for the Exploitation of Meteorologi- lished within the space component of the cal Satellites (EUMETSAT). Around the time European Commission’s Directorate General the Action Plan was published, the EC/ESA (DG) Enterprise and Industry with the pri- Framework Agreement entered into force. mary objective of ensuring the delivery of This document already included provisions to priority services by 2008. Other objectives of deal with the legal and managerial basis for the GMES Bureau were to address the issues the establishment of the GMES space compo- of the GMES governance structure and the nent. In 2005 further clarifications regarding long-term financial sustainability of the sys- the ESA-EU responsibilities were made in the tem. “Orientations on GMES” document. In 2010 the transitional bodies – required for EUMETSAT is responsible for the operation of the initiation phase – were replaced by new the Sentinel satellites that have objectives structures that would assist the European closely related to its core missions of meteor- Commission in managing the (pre)operational ology and climate monitoring. This entails the phases of the programme. A GMES Commit- Sentinel 4 and 5 satellites that deal with at- tee would ensure a coordinated implementa- mospheric monitoring, Sentinel 3 for marine tion of the programme and identify gaps in monitoring and Sentinel 6 for ocean altim- the infrastructure. The Committee, consisting etry. To this effect it signed a Framework of national representatives, would assist the Agreement with ESA in 2009 concerning the Commission in ensuring the coordination of cooperation on the GMES space component. contributions to Copernicus by the EU, the Member States and inter-governmental or- The European Environment Agency (EEA) ganisations as well as coordination with the plays a key role in coordinating the in-situ private sector, making the best use of exist- component, which relies on a large number of ing capacities and identifying gaps to be ad- facilities, instruments and services owned dressed at Union level. Finally, a GMES User and operated at regional, national and inter- Forum would advise the EC in the definition governmental levels both domestically and and validation of user requirements, and outside Europe. Unlike the space component, would be responsible for the coordination the in-situ infrastructure is largely developed with public sector users. When the European and maintained by Member States and re- Commission announced the name change of mains their responsibility. GMES to Copernicus in December 2012 the The challenges related to the establishment names of the GMES Committee and User of this complex programme architecture de- Forum were changed accordingly. manded a number of governance support In terms of funding, the European Commis- bodies throughout the various implementa- sion and the European Space Agency co-fund tion stages. To this effect two transitional the development phase of the programme – bodies were called into existence by the 2004 in which the space component is the most Action Plan in order to coordinate the initial costly element. For the implementation phase phase. For the management operations a of GMES the EC provided R&D funds under its GMES Programme Office was created. This Framework Programme (FP) 6 for the period body was implemented using mechanisms of 2003 - 2006 and under its FP 7 for the period the 2003 EU-ESA Framework Agreement and 2007 - 2013. The operational phase of the would oversee the implementation of the programme, including further recurring satel- overall GMES operational management. It lites, relies on EC funding and is included in was staffed by representatives of the Euro- the 2014-2020 Multiannual Financial Frame- pean Commission, ESA, seconded experts work (MFF) of the European Union. The deci- from Member States and relevant interna-

ESPI 3 April 2015

sion to secure Copernicus funding inside the from the data and services. This does, MFF followed difficult negotiations in the however, also raise the question of how Council in 2013 and the result is a major EO can be used to serve less tangible ob- achievement, considering that in 2011 it was jectives. How can it be assured that the proposed to finance the programme outside scientific findings resulting from Coperni- the MFF. The commitment of long-term fund- cus can be effectively communicated to ing is not only important from a practical decision makers and the general public – perspective. Users and user communities leading to a better understanding of our secure in the knowledge that data streams environment and a will to take the neces- will be available for the foreseeable future will sary protective actions? be willing to increasingly rely on them and as 2. How can stewardship of Copernicus be a result their business models will ultimately created? change accordingly. In this sense financial Since Copernicus is going to be an opera- commitment is key to the development of tional system, it will be around for the downstream business opportunities and thus decades to come and its capabilities will for the overall viability of the downstream EO change as new generations of Sentinels sector. will be launched. Considering this long term horizon and the desired user-driven character, how can it be assured that all 1.2 The Unresolved Issues relevant stakeholders join forces so as to guarantee its optimal functioning and From an overall perspective, the pro- structure in the future? In other words, gramme’s political and technical implementa- how is it assured that Copernicus will re- tion has been successful. The road taken has main a sustainable and widely shared and resulted in the establishment of a solid pro- truly ‘public good’ for Europe? gramme and financial architecture, while the The actors involved in the implementation of programme’s physical components are struc- the programme have been active in address- tured and managed in a proper and sustain- ing the above questions and a number of able fashion for the foreseeable future. This significant initiatives have been taken. Yet, includes the distribution of responsibilities, there seems to be a recognition within the the mechanisms for systemic integration and European Earth Observation community that adaptability and the presence of long term there are unresolved issues in terms of creat- financial continuity. In this sense the pro- ing a sustainable environment conducive to gramme has come a long way since its con- the optimisation of Copernicus success. The ceptualisation in 1998. Europe has, in a rela- authors of the current document wish to pro- tively short time span, been able to transform vide impetus to a process which tackles the a political commitment into a state-of-the-art outstanding issues. Earth observation programme with global monitoring capacities. Now that Copernicus is entering its opera- 1.2.1 Maximising the Benefits of Copernicus tional phase the promise it has carried is also Maximising the benefits from Copernicus’ starting to materialise. At the same time, data is currently pursued through two chan- however, the programme’s ability to function nels. The adoption in 2013 of a data policy as an operational and user-driven constella- for Copernicus of full, free and open access tion becomes crucial. In this respect two for users was an important pillar for allowing main questions arise with regard to the fu- the data to be used widely. For most end- ture management of Copernicus as a public users, however, raw data is of little use and resource: therefore the six thematic services were cre- 1. How can the benefits of Copernicus be ated in addition to the specific data policy. maximised? The implementation and operation of the Given the current programme architec- services are, as illustrated in table 1 below, ture and technical capabilities of the first managed by different institutions in Europe. generation of Sentinels, how can the po- This strong degree of decentralisation was tential of the Copernicus system be opti- chosen in order to make best use of existing mised? In the first instance, this comes strengths, as there is a lot of valuable exper- down to generating the maximal socio- tise present in the European institutional economic benefits that can be derived landscape.

ESPI 4 April 2015 Optimising Europe’s Benefits from the Copernicus Programme

Service Status Components and/or Projects

Global Component (coordinated by the JRC) Land Monitoring Operational Pan-European Component (implemented by the EEA) Local Component (implemented by the EEA)

Emergency Copernicus Emergency Management Service (GIO EMS) Operational Management European Flood Awareness System (EFAS) (implemented by the JRC)

Atmosphere Monitoring Atmospheric Composition and Climate - Interim Implemen- Pre-Operational Monitoring tation (MAC-II)

Marine Pre-Operational MyOcean2 Monitoring

Border Surveillance: G-MOSAIC Maritime Surveillance: • Development of Pre-operational Services for Highly Innovative Under Security Maritime Surveillance Capabilities (DOLPHIN) Development • New Service Capabilities for Integrated and Advanced Maritime Surveillance (NEREIDS) • Simulator for Moving Target Indicator System (SIMTISYS) Support to EU External Action: G-MOSAIC

Under Climate Change Development is supported by a series of FP7 projects Development

Table 1: The Six Copernicus Services, their Status and Components and/or Projects.

For this reason the services are compartmen- however, that there is potential for further talised into six and for many of them actual benefits to be harvested from the daily op- operations are split into subservices with erations of the services and the interaction different operators. The challenge in terms of with the users and user communities. benefit maximisation here is not the high In addition to this, an overlay coordination degree of decentralisation of the services. mechanism would make it possible to pursue Rather, it is the fact that no mechanism is in a number of other strategic benefits, includ- place to tackle the attendant management ing increased impact internationally. Coperni- and optimisation challenges that follow from cus would be in an excellent position to decentralisation. Thus, there is no operational gauge unaddressed societal needs related to function or mechanism in existence to coor- EO data beyond the core purposes of envi- dinate the six services which involves all the ronmental monitoring and security. The ex- relevant stakeholders, notably those with the amples of the U.S. Geological Survey and the most direct link to the users. In the current U.S. National Geospatial Intelligence Agency architecture neither the Copernicus Commit- illustrate that there are strong arguments for tee nor the Copernicus User Forum can fulfil more holistic approaches to data manage- these tasks in the manner that will be re- ment in order to widen and broaden benefits. quired for sustained optimisation of Coperni- Interestingly, this would also offer the oppor- cus’s success. The Copernicus Committee has tunity of leveraging what can be learned from only the EC and EU Member States as full and EO to the benefit of society as a whole. In the voting members. The mandate is political in current political debate on the health of the nature and the membership so wide that the Earth there is a serious lack of distinction Committee cannot play a coordinating role in between what must be considered scientific an operational sense. Notably, the key part- fact and political assessment. There is a need ners of the Commission in Copernicus do not to clearly communicate this important distinc- play a role in the Copernicus Committee tion. One of the most concerning issues today which is commensurate with their stake in is that the political debate on the environ- the success of the programme. Moreover, ment and climate is a debate which allows without a central management mechanism, best scientific assumptions to be replaced by the complexity in the distribution of Coperni- political convenience arguments. There is an cus support functions across satellite, in situ urgent need to communicate Earth Observa- and other ground infrastructure, operations, tion science results in such a fashion that service operations and routine user input and incontrovertible boundaries are set for politi- feedback will stand in the way of optimisa- cal discussion. For this to happen the body tion. This does not imply that the services politic must progressively get a better under- themselves are not performant. It means,

ESPI 5 April 2015

standing of the results provided by Earth 1.2.2 Creating Stewardship of Copernicus Observation. Again, the organisations which are closest to the data must ensure that a Copernicus will be subject to a number of mechanism exists which effectively communi- changes as it evolves over time. Although cates science results to non-science stake- these developments are driven by different holders. It is important to note that this is factors, many of them will eventually demand not a problem unique to Copernicus and a stronger stewardship of the Copernicus therefore it should not be expected to resolve programme. Also in this sense there is an this issue in isolation. A coordination mecha- increased need for centralised, integrative nism for the Copernicus programme, how- management in order to serve the diverse ever, could ensure the issue is picked up and user communities in the best possible fash- that progress is pursued in conjunction with ion. other players such as GEO. A key issue in this regard is the governance In this respect, particularly over the longer role of the European Commission, which will term, it is also necessary to have an observa- increase considerably in the future. The EU is tory on the lookout for ‘black swan’ phenom- already responsible for the availability and ena. Copernicus is clearly a key tool to moni- continuity of services and the aggregation of tor the health of the Earth. But the Earth is political will. However, the funding situation presently observed based on what we know is for new generations of Sentinels will change. relevant for Earth health today. Going for- The later phases of second generation Senti- ward it is necessary to assume that new nel satellites will presumably no longer be co- threats to Earth health will arise and – as funded with ESA because operational services experience of the past few decades has fall outside ESA’s scope of research and de- shown – it is a highly advisable ‘insurance velopment. In the long run this centralisation policy’ to be constantly on the outlook for of governance will confront the European new Earth health threats and for data uses Commission with a number of important deci- and sources that could give insight into these sions regarding the constellation’s sustain- possible new threats. To scan the horizon for ability. the unknown requires holistic cooperation Copernicus’ success over the long term, i.e. between the institutions having the best over several generations of infrastructure, knowledge of the known, and this is another hinges on the ability of the programme struc- reason why an integrative partnership must tures to accommodate new and changed user be built between the European Commission needs over time and, to reconcile them with and the organisations that are closest to the the continuity requirements. To this effect, users and closest to the new enabling tech- mechanisms to capture these needs and pri- nologies. oritise them in accordance with available The authors of the current document are funding have to be in place. At this time the aware that also the mechanisms and ele- Copernicus User Forum does not join users ments proposed in the above will not in with all the major decision makers and does themselves ensure that the full potential of not provide for substantive mechanisms to Copernicus services is delivered. In fact, this filter and prioritise needs relative to available could never be achieved by the institutional funds. The Copernicus Committee and the players only. After all, the full, free and open Copernicus User Forum are without doubt access data policy is meant to ensure that essential, but there still remains an important also a wider suite of services can be devel- gap. The European Union clearly desires to oped which will deliver more diverse benefits create a truly user-driven programme, as has to a wider range of communities. In this been frequently stated. This requires that the sense the structure of the programme re- organisations which are closest to users con- quires – and has acknowledged – a key role tinue to be part of a partnership model with to be fulfilled by various non-institutional the European Commission, and that the part- players. Thus the authors believe it is essen- nership evolves towards a more integrative tial that steps be taken by the institutional model. players to facilitate and encourage data use Such a partnership model should aim at re- by the non-institutional players. Again, this taining the fields of authority of each partner, could be achieved through integrated coop- whilst allowing the particular expertise of eration by the Copernicus partners, this be- each partner to flow into a decision making ing beneficial both in terms of programme process which makes prioritisations and fund- optimisation in the short term and for the ing decisions on new data use and next gen- long haul. erations of infrastructure on the most informed basis. This is true in terms of user needs, technical feasibility and the avenues possibly opened by new technology. But also

ESPI 6 April 2015 Optimising Europe’s Benefits from the Copernicus Programme

continuous monitoring of the six defined ser- in this fashion. It is in this respect important vices to allow for an evolutionary path, and to also capitalise on the ability of Copernicus constant consideration of cross fertilisation data to serve wider communities than just between the services and the appropriateness those of environmental monitoring and secu- of creating new services should be considered rity.

2. Potential Solution: a Copernicus Task Force

The above review acknowledges that many developing user involvement mechanisms. essential components of the Copernicus pro- Given the proper mandate it could serve the gramme have been addressed very well. purpose of a clearing house for the key Nevertheless a few functions essential for the stakeholders in order to reinforce informed operational status of the programme remain decisions that would ensure programme op- underdeveloped. More precisely, a number of timisation drawing on an integrated and ho- key issues – required to optimise the poten- listic perspective. The authors believe it tial benefits and turn Copernicus into a user- might be desirable to establish the Task Force driven constellation – are either not yet in in such a way that its precise scope would be place, or insufficiently so. Interestingly, these able to evolve and expand over time – in issues share to a large extent the same root accordance with the changing status and cause and therefore they could be jointly scope of the Copernicus programme. addressed. In practical terms this would require formal Copernicus appears to lack an institutional and centralised coordination mechanisms and clearing house function which has an over- communication channels to be established view of the many scattered programme func- with the major players involved in Coperni- tions and which would aggregate, through cus, such as the European Commission, the mechanisms of centralisation, the required European Space Agency, the European Envi- critical mass in terms of demand, exposure, ronment Agency, EUMETSAT, The Joint Re- expertise and authority. The issues identified search Centre and the European Union Satel- in our evaluation are to a large extent the lite Centre (EUSC). result of the lack of a central clearing house function. The authors therefore propose the creation of a “Copernicus Task Force” as an initial governance solution to address the missing links and the resulting lack of certain programme support functions. It was already stressed in the introduction that such a vehicle should not imply the creation of any new physical infrastructure or organisations and that it should be established in a way that respects the respective responsibilities of the organisations currently involved as they have evolved before and throughout the implementation of Copernicus. Thus, a Copernicus Task Force should be conceived as a light- weight structure that serves as a counter- weight to the very pronounced degree of decentralisation in the current programme architecture. One important advantage of the Task Force proposal over other perhaps more stove-piped initiatives one could imagine, is Figure 2: The Task Force’s Support Functions. that it has the potential to go beyond the crucial tasks of spurring user uptake and

ESPI 7 April 2015

EU Member States, major institutional users, to be had from linking such study activities to private industry, end users and user commu- the consideration of new, modified or evolved nities could be consulted within their remits data sources. Additionally, study and advice and involved correspondingly, noting, how- could be generated and used by the Task ever, that the Copernicus Task Force should Force to reflect on evolutions in terms of not replace the Copernicus Committee or the governance, data policy, archiving, and data Copernicus User Forum. distribution methods. The Task Force could also seek to measure system performance The programme support functions of the Task across the board by the use of defined per- Force could be grouped into three self- formance indicators, this again providing a reinforcing categories: Operational Activities, key input for system optimisation. Study and Advice Mechanisms, Political Own- ership. Finally, the Task Force should be given the task of stimulating the communication of Operational Activities scientific findings to non-science stakeholders, with the aim of explaining what best The operational activities are perhaps the science ‘facts’ are, so that the necessary po- most urgent element, because of the critical- litical debates will be focused on how to take ity of optimising the services, the user uptake action, based on the best evidence science and the user involvement. This entails agree- can give. ing on mechanisms to promote the use of the data proactively by reaching out to new user Political Ownership groups, encouraging existing users to use data and data products more extensively, Since the Task Force would serve as a clear- looking for synergies between services and ing house for many of the decentralised pro- uses. This should include steps to create a jects and responsibilities, it offers an excel- Copernicus product ecosystem allowing value lent opportunity to facilitate political owner- added products and applications to be shared ship of the entire Copernicus programme by effectively, and product innovation to be the partners – keeping in mind that the role stimulated. These steps would be an addition of the European Commission will become to the existing tools intended to spur the even more distinct over time because of its market for downstream applications. increasing funding role. If cohesive political ownership is leveraged properly it could Study and Advice Mechanisms strengthen the overall Copernicus governance, increase transparency and lead to even Including study and advice functions within better informed decisions. Strong political the remit of the Task Force could be a power- ownership is needed in order to reinforce ful accompaniment to the operational activi- Europe’s position on the global stage con- ties. Study and advice functions could include cerning environmental monitoring issues. market studies and the Black Swan phenom- This, in turn, would facilitate a better fit be- ena monitoring activities mentioned earlier, tween Europe’s capabilities and those of non- but could also involve more general socio- European actors in the EO field. economic benefit analyses. In this context it is noted that there is a virtuous circle effect

Conclusions and a Possible Way Forward

The Copernicus programme is rapidly moving have detected a realisation among the vari- towards full operational status. From an ous players involved that a number of impor- overall perspective Europe can be proud of tant issues remain to be addressed. what it has achieved in a rather short time. It In order to address these issues in an inte- has been able to successfully implement an grated and sensible fashion the authors pro- integrated state-of-the-art environmental pose the creation of the Copernicus Task monitoring constellation with global observa- Force. By making use of the existing exper- tion capabilities. Nevertheless, the authors tise and distribution of responsibilities the

ESPI 8 April 2015 Optimising Europe’s Benefits from the Copernicus Programme

Task Force would fulfil three essential pro- The authors of this document believe that a gramme support functions. First, it would task force constituted as described could be a have an operational component within which helpful step towards a more integrated way stronger user uptake and user involvement of working together and filling the gaps that schemes would be developed. This should can be identified currently. However, the further increase the expected benefits gener- authors do not necessarily think that this is ated by Copernicus. Second, it would be sup- the only way that gaps could be filled and ported by study and advice mechanisms that programme outputs optimised. Hence, it provide critical reflection and information to would seem sensible to seek to get all the the stakeholders that ultimately steer the relevant players, EC, ESA, EUMETSAT, EEA, programme’s long term evolution and would EUSC together for an exploratory discussion coordinate more effective communication of of the task force proposal and what other scientific findings. Third, the scope and struc- realistic alternatives may be identified. ture of the task force would offer an excellent It is urgent to get a dialogue going among opportunity to strengthen and centralise the the key stakeholders, without such a dialogue political ownership over the programme. The being pre-conditioned on an acceptance of latter would lead to best-informed decision the task force proposal. making, increased transparency and better international outreach.

ESPI 9 April 2015

Mission Statement of ESPI

The European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) provides decision-makers with an informed view on mid- to long-term issues relevant to Europe’s space activities. In this context, ESPI acts as an independent platform for developing po- sitions and strategies.